sci.physics.relativity

"Dr. Henri Wilson" wrote in message
news:lvkks31hb7g75eoccc70s9742c9kb94gnr@...
> On Sat, 1 Mar 2008 11:46:05 -0800, The Ghost In The Machine
> wrote:
>
>>In , HW@....(Dr. Henri Wilson)
>>
>> wrote
>
>>>>
>>>>Pedant Point. No . .a clock always reads the same .. it shows the
>>>>proper
>>>>time for that clock .. someone else looking at a clock isn't going to
>>>>change
>>>>the reading (ie what the clock shows)
>>>
>>> Fartful, you have once again agreed with me. You are effectively
>>> stating that 'NOW' here is NOW everywhere.
>>
>>If one defines "now" as "the point at which I observed the central clock
>>striking 12", perhaps.
>
> No Ghost!
>
> If I am 1 light second from the GIANT CLOCK (and MAR), then when I see it
> strike 12:00:00, (which, at its location, might be defined as its 'NOW' at
> that
> universal instant), then MY clock will read 12:00:01,

Yes .. if you are at rest wrt to GIANT CLOCK. Otherwise you will not. You
may see a later time or an earlier one due to Doppler.

> which is my current 'now'
> ...This is indeed ITS current now although its APPARENT reading does not
> directly indicate that fact to me. My current NOW always correspond with
> its
> actual 'now' even though MY clock always shows a reading 1 second higher
> than
> its.
>
>>> Simultaneity is absolute. Einstein was an idiot.
>>
>>Define "simultaneity" in this context. Einstein's
>>thought-experiment (using a train and two lightning
>>flashes) shows there are problems even within Newtonian
>>theory, mostly because of light propagation delays.
>
> Just construct an 'instantaneous universe' using an array of presynched
> and
> perfect clocks. Let them perform all the timing experiments and collate
> the
> information later.

What makes you think you can?